Zelig Posted December 23, 2010 Posted December 23, 2010 Ive got a question If Bradman was born in 1970 and/or SRT born in 1910; how much would each have averaged at the end of their careers (assuming they still became cricketers)... SRT: 110-120 Don: 0 Don wouldn't have even got into the Taylor's/ Waugh's XI and by the time the 'goos had fallen apart (2007-present), Don wud have been old enough to carry a bat. :beee:
zen Posted December 23, 2010 Posted December 23, 2010 ok good enough for me. :-) Probably you should also ask him how much Bhajji would avg too :P
The Outsider Posted December 23, 2010 Posted December 23, 2010 Probably you should also ask him how much Bhajji would avg too :P Around 45 - he would be the Gundappa Viswanath of Bradman's times with his classical late cuts and pull shots. And we already know that Rameez Raja would have trumped Hammond.
zen Posted December 23, 2010 Posted December 23, 2010 Around 45 - he would be the Gundappa Viswanath of Bradman's times with his classical late cuts and pull shots. And we already know that Rameez Raja would have trumped Hammond. Bhajji, the batsman :hatsoff:
99.94 Posted December 24, 2010 Posted December 24, 2010 - Got his 50th test 100 in his 175th test. 50 test 100 is the new bench mark and supersedes an avg of 100. So what if no one else has played 175 tests to give themselves a chance of get 50 100s. Wasn't Kapil the best quick bowler when he broke Hadlee's record after playing 130 odd tests. 50 100s in 175 tests > 29 100s in 52 tests, as it is the number of 100s that counts and not how many games you need to get that record. - Played against super fast bowlers and fielders. So what if so many others played those bowlers too and averaged that much. Others don't play with the pressure of expectations from 1 billion fans. - The 2 mins video clips that I saw on video is enough to convince me that even someone like Rameez Raja would be better than the likes of Hammond and Hutton. - Some poll in some newspapaer says so too. - Anybody can avg a 100 if they get to play against minnows. See MoYo's avg for reference. It's difficult to avg 55+ and score 50 test 100s. My goodness what a compelling argument.. :haha:
Asoka Posted December 30, 2010 Posted December 30, 2010 Bradman>SRT,no comparison.That guy was a ****ing freak.
CSK Fan Posted December 30, 2010 Posted December 30, 2010 Your response is even more comical than I expected. So I guess, when Bradman said that of today's batsman, Tendulkar is closest to how he would probably bat implies that people thought Tendulkar is the greatest (even greater than Bradman) :hysterical: This is exactly how "Tendulkar is the greatest" band is suppose to play. I mean if you guys didn't think crap how would you imagine Tendulkar to be the greatest :giggle: Sachin was the only batsmen and one among the only 2 players Don invited for his birthday. that in itself shows that he held Sachin in very high regards and above the likes of Lara and Ponting. I dont think anyone concluded from don's statement that he thought Sachin was better than him
akshayxyz Posted January 4, 2011 Posted January 4, 2011 To be fair - it was a flat track, so swing/pace does not matter. ;-P
Sachinism Posted January 4, 2011 Posted January 4, 2011 Where is patriot? he'd ask you 'but did he dominate against Steyn?'
zen Posted January 4, 2011 Posted January 4, 2011 It won't be long before ppl start saying that openers are better batsmen (even if the avg less) than middle order batsmen because they take guard in periods when the bowlers are the freshest and play in conditions that is more likely to suit the bowlers with the new ball :giggle:
Precambrian Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 Two interesting stats : Sachin vs Bradman Saw this on another forum: if Tendulkar played only on his favorite grounds (let's take the top 19 of them, 9 more than the sum total Bradman managed to play on his entire test career (that's almost 100% more), he'd be averaging 105 from 56 tests with 7078 runs with 33 100s and 16 50s, which means, almost every aspect of Bradman's records can be considered a subset of Sachin's career and records... A sarcastic post Nah, dimwits them the lot who dare to even argue 33000 international runs and 99 hundreds count for something. A billion of them born and mind washed to be just stereotypical sachin tendulkar fans. what a ridiculous idea it is to even consider he is after all the best batsman in a billion or more even after 20 years? How dare one talk up his so called achievement of having faced a potential 578 different bowlers at the international level? Or having played at over 105 different international grounds and still able to adapt accordingly? (BTW 32 of those bowlers average under 27 in those matches, min qual - 10 wickets) (FTR - Bradman faced "potentially" a total of 69 different international bowlers in his career, (only 1 of them averaging less than 27 - min qual 10 wickets), and played on a sum total of 10 grounds) silly em fanboys... B->B->
Sachin=GOD Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 So what??? Don't you know Bradman averaged 99.94 and that means he is the be all and end all of batting :facepalm:
Sachinism Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 If Sachin can pick his favourite grounds, why can't Bradman? This debate is never gonna end. Just leave it
Precambrian Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 So what??? Don't you know Bradman averaged 99.94 and that means he is the be all and end all of batting :facepalm: :finger::finger: Bradboy :cantstop:
Precambrian Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 If Sachin can pick his favourite grounds, why can't Bradman? This debate is never gonna end. Just leave it It's not about picking grounds, we are considering 19 grounds, remember Bradman played on just 10 grounds. Not to mention the kind of bowlers both had to face.
zen Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 The thing abt other batsmen is that you have to "pick and chose" to make them avg 100, while Bradman just does that with his career avg Also in trying to match Bradman, many forget the gap b/w Bradman and his peers. In trying to pick and chose, many forget to use common sense. For example, picking grounds is a pointless exercise (why not pick grounds for Ponting, Lara, etc as well and then compare them to see which one tripumps based on those criterias). And then we don't even know how many the next best guy avgs on those grounds. The exercise of showing Sachin(or whoever) > Bradman is nothing more than an exercise to show how stupid those following Sachin (or whoever) are .... As they say, love is blind :P
akshayxyz Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 It is not over yet guys. We are gonna witness more pwnage before the world ends in 2012.
Sachin=GOD Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 The thing abt other batsmen is that you have to "pick and chose" to make them avg 100, while Bradman just does that with his career avg Also in trying to match Bradman, many forget the gap b/w Bradman and his peers. In trying to pick and chose, many forget to use common sense. For example, picking grounds is a pointless exercise (why not pick grounds for Ponting, Lara, etc as well and then compare them to see which one tripumps based on those criterias). And then we don't even know how many the next best guy avgs on those grounds. The exercise of showing Sachin(or whoever) > Bradman is nothing more than an exercise to show how stupid those following Sachin (or whoever) are .... As they say, love is blind :P so anyone who chooses not to blindly follow "the legend of Sir Don Bradman" is stupid??
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now